4x5" - FOMA 100 or EFKE 100

[vic vic]

please, let me know your experiences with those films, both in terms of Image qualities and Physical issues.
if comparison possible, how they are compared to acros 100, fp-4, hp-5, txp-320?
while looking for some info about them, the long exposures seem problematic with them. how problematic, compared to fp-4 reciprocity for example ?

thanks
vic

 

[thmm]

The reciprocity characteristics of the Efke film are quite good, while the Foma film is quite poor in this regard. To illustrate this, for a 10s exposure, Efke 100 needs a correction of 1/3 stop (2/3 stops for 100s), for Foma it is 3 stops (4 stops for 100s). FP4 would require about 1.5 stops for 10s.
You can find more info at http://www.foma.cz/upload/foma/prilohy/F_pan_100_en.pdf
and http://adox.de/ADOX_Filme/ADOX_CHS_Filme/ADOX_CHS_100/ADOX_CHS_100.html (this link is from a german company that rebrands the Efke, bablefish or something similar might help; I can't seem to find the complete information in english).

 

[vic vic]

thmm ..
i should have thought about the data sheet ... thanks. this is quite dramatic, so one thing in advance for the efke, cause in LF it is common to get down to long exposures.

BTW ... one more question i forgot to ask :
which one of those films have better/acceptable PUSH flexibility ?

 

[RobertV]

Apart from the reciprocity factor I should consider the way of sheet film development due to the fact both film emulsions are very soft, especially the Efke film.
In a (rotary) Jobo 3000 or Jobo 2509N sheet film development the mechanical handling is a minimum which is certainly important for both films.

I do not think the push capabilities are very different for both film. Best bed is the Fomapan T200 (Creative 200) for push capabilities. An iso 125-160 in most developers and push capabilities till +2F. (iso 800)

Best regards,

Robert

 

[Ian Grant]

Vic, I've been shooting Fomapan 100 & 200 at 50 & 100 EI for some time now in my Yashicamat, and also in 9x12 & 5x4, they are nice films, I've yet to shoot in light levels low enough for reciprocity to be a problem. I also use EFKE 25 in 5x4 & 10x8 at 50 EI, but always when using a tripod, I haven't tried the EFKE 100 ISO film for over 30 years as I really like the slow version.

Fomapan 100 & 200 are quirky films, they need very careful exposure & processing to get the best out of them and are very prone to high contrast if you're not careful so I wouldn't recommend them for push processing. The EFKE films are quite a bit more flexible in that respect.

My preference is to shoot Delta 100/400 when possible but Foma films are easier for me to buy off the shelf at the moment (here in Turkey). Both Foma & EFKE films are softer emulsions when wet compared to Ilford, Kodak & Fuji emulsions, but the EFKE films need particular care when handling wet films, and with consistent temperatures during processing.

Ian

 

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Vic, I have used the Efke 25 & 100 in 4x5,8x10,11x14 and 8x20. In 4x5 and 8x10 I develop in pyrocat-hd in tanks with minimal agitation and get great results especially when pushing the film. the 11x14 and the 8x20 I do in trays one at a time and if you are careful you will not scratch the film. the pyro does seem to harden the emulsion. I generally push my film to build the required density I need for carbon printing and the Efke films work great for me.

Jim

 

[vic vic]

hi all and thanks for responses.

@ robert
the tank is the hanging type, but i do know the softness of efke films (the slow ones). not nice but manageable with extra care.
i used the foma-200 a few times. nice film but not my taste.

@ ian and jim
the slow ones are amazing indeed, but i would rather prefer some more speed. this is especially for hand-held work and for portraits in environment conditions/light. one stop difference (compared to 50) and one or two more stops pushability is a great differences sometimes in those cases.
so, from both of u i understand: efke is pushable, foma is less so. mine is for enlargements but i do like to push film even if not required.

 

[RobertV]

Fomapan T200 has a very typical form of the silver halogenide crystals. Classical cubical and hexagonal type grain. The effect in Para-amino phenol (like R09 Rodinal) is therefore very sharp and with a regular grain. I like it for architecture very much. Here some 35mm Leica shots:

 

[Mahler_one]

Nice work Robert!

Ed

 

[RobertV]

thanks

 

[rpsawin]

Robert,

Very nice work. I like the looks of this film/developer combination. Thanks for your post.

Bob

 

[RobertV]

I am just testing this film (Fomapan Creative 200) with the famous W665 (Windisch) developer.
This Ortho Phenylenediamine based, ultra fine grain developer, was designed in 1941 (by Hans Windisch) and used for maximum resolution and sharpness in the 35mm film results by the Luftwaffe during the bombing in WWII.

A kind of solarisation is formed which is removed after the fix process by a 2-3% Acetic Acid or Hydrochloric Acid and then a very fine grained negative is the result. After the war the receipture has been sold for decades under Perutz W665 which company was also bought by Agfa-Gevaert (merged in 1964) till the end of the 60's.

The problem is that there is no source for the modern type film emulsions and W665. So everything must be tested up from zero.
My first 35mm results with Rollei Pan 25 are finished. E.I. 25 and from 40x50cm no grain to focus with my Peak focusser. With the mentioned Fomapan Creative 200 (E.I. 100) just some small grain to focus on.

Why Agfa (Perutz) stopped making this W665 is not clear to me.
Maybe the removal of the solarisation layer was too complicated in a general process for accepted film development. How more I have done with this 1941 developer, how more impressed I am with the resuls.

Best regards,

Robert

(Always underway with his (Leica) M7 )

 

[Philippe Grunchec]

Robert, I like Foma films a lot! I would like to get a visible grain à la Rodinal with the 400 in medium format, but even with R09 it remains too discrete. What would be your suggestion? Neofin blue?
Another question: I will have a 8x10" project, using T200. Is Promicrol a "pushing" possibility? Thanks in advance!

 

[RobertV]

For getting MORE grain out of Fomapan 400, try Rodinal in a rotary process. For a right exposure: R09 one shot made in Germany (Rodinal) 1+50 and E.I. 200.

Old Promicol (May & Baker) was a fine grain developer, not a real push developer. While an important chemical stuff for this developer was obsolete the May & Baker Promicol died.
The new recepture (Champion) has nothing to do with the old days.

For real push development of Fomapan Creative 200 you can try:
DD-X
Microphen
Diafine (E.I. 250 only)

Here is a test where you can see what the Fomapan Creative 200 is able to:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/237741898/

 

[RobertV]

N-(beta-hydroxyethyl)-o-aminophenol sulfate was the obselete chemical stuff in May & Baker Promicol.

 

[Philippe Grunchec]

Thank you, Robert, but I don't have a rotary processor!... Don't you think that Neofin Blue would give me more grain than Rodinal?
For the T200, you don't mention Emofin: is it a bad combo?

 

[mikebarger]

I tried one box of Efke 4x5 when J&C was selling it. Out of the first 10 negatives, three or four had coating defects. I gave the rest of that box away and went back to HP5.

A fair amount of time has passed, is the Quality Control any better for Efke?

Mike

 

[RobertV]

Well shake Rodinal like a milk shake instead of a rotary development and you will get much more grain.
As push developer: Emofin, I think so yes, but I have no personal experience with this Tetenal 2-bath developer.
Neofin Blau, maybe, it's a Beutler type and more or less simmilar like AM50/AM20, Amaloco (1936) . Very nice with Rollei Pan 25 or Efke 25.

Defects: Efke, yes their Q.C. need improvement. But who is going to pay for it? Very old machines and an old coating plant. The single layer principle from former Dr. Schleussner later Dupont and more later Efke, was magic but the film must be OK.

 

[Philippe Grunchec]

I gave up using Efke/Adox!... Too fragile. Sorry, Mirko.

 

[JPD]

When I took test rolls of Agfa APX 100 and Efke R100 in 120, I exposed them +3, +2, +1, 0, -1, -2, -3, and developed them in the same developer (I wanted to find the correct times in Agfa 8), I found that Efke 100 is much[/b] more forgiving than the more modern APX 100. Perfect film for box cameras with fixed speed and aperture. I haven't tried Foma 100, but will some day.

 

[RobertV]

Here a test of Fomapan Creative 200 in Rodinal: +1, 0, -1, -2.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/237741898/

 

[Philippe Grunchec]

Robert, you don't mention Foma developers (LQN, P): don't you like them with Foma films? According to the Fotoimpex catalog, the LQN 1+10 gives 100 ISO for the Fomapan 100, and 400 for the Fomapan 400 (the 200 is not mentioned).

 

[RobertV]

http://www.foma.cz/upload/foma/prilohy/F_pan_400_en.pdf

gamma=0,7 gives iso 320 with the Foma LQN (1+10) reference developer.
But I never tried this Foma developer due to the fact local manufactureres have simmilar type speed enhancing developers available. (AM74/RHS, Acu-1, Tmax, DD-X. Microphen).